 |
|
|
August 30, 2002
To tan or not to tan
 | Fred Gibbons and Meg
Gerrard and their attitude-changing filter camera. Photo by Bob
Elbert. |
by Bridget Bailey, News Service intern
Two researchers specializing in the psychology of health say they've found a
more productive way to wean sun worshipers from catching some rays. They've
proven that when you actually show people what ultraviolet (UV) radiation is
doing to skin, they have a surprisingly high tendency to settle for the
pastier look.
Frederick Gibbons and Meg Gerrard, professors of psychology, have been
studying the impact of UV damaged skin on behavior for about two years.
Recently, the two decided to try a new approach to their research -- UV
photography.
Gibbons said there has been no previous examination of the impact of UV
photos on behavior.
"After seeing test photos, we were convinced that they could influence
behavior," he said.
The study began with 34 male and 36 female Iowa State undergraduates who had
visited a tanning bed in the last six months, or who were going someplace
sunny for spring break. They agreed to participate in a testing session
described as a "study of recreational attitudes."
Students were randomly assigned to two separate groups. After filling out a
questionnaire that included questions about attitudes toward tanning, the
participants were told that the purpose of the study was to examine
attitudes toward sun exposure.
Participants in the first group had their photo taken once with normal black
and white film and once with UV filter film. A black-and-white UV filter
photo reveals areas of skin damage by making the skin's melanin pigment
visible on film. Skin damage appears as dark blotches or shaded areas.
After students saw their normal and UV photos and received an explanation of
the difference between the two, they received a two-minute lecture about the
role the sun plays in premature wrinkling and skin cancer. Students then
filled out a second questionnaire and received three brochures that
described the effects of UV radiation and discussed different forms of UV
protection.
The second group heard the same two-minute lecture on the sun, filled out
the same questionnaire and received the same three brochures, but were not
photographed.
At the follow-up four weeks later, students were asked about tanning booth
usage. The results were significant, according to Gibbons.
"The most surprising result was the powerful impact the UV photos had on
Iowa State students' tanning booth usage," Gibbons said.
Gibbons said he wasn't shocked by the results of the UV camera experiment,
but he was surprised to find that more than 80 percent of the students who
participated had noticeable UV-caused skin damage. Of that 80 percent,
Gibbons said about half exhibited signs of severe skin damage. For
comparison, a similar study had been done at the University of California,
San Diego. Ninety percent of the San Diego participants had noticeable
UV-caused skin damage.
Gibbons said there was a two-thirds reduction in the amount of tanning booth
usage among Iowa State students who were shown UV photographs.
A second Iowa State study the following spring semester with 134 Iowa State
students showed essentially the same pattern of results.
In both cases, the changes were statistically significant, Gibbons said.
They showed that a change in behavior was related to a change in students'
attitudes.
Those in the UV group reported more concerns about tanning and less interest
in getting a tan after they had received the photo, Gibbons said.
"The more their attitudes were changed by the camera, the less likely they
were to use a tanning booth."
Gibbons and Gerrard have done several studies on UV behavior, one of which
is approved for publication sometime next spring in Health
Psychology. The pair currently is preparing two more submissions.
They have submitted a grant proposal to the National Cancer Institute for
funding to continue research with University of California, San Diego, and
ISU undergraduates, as well as with beach-goers in San Diego and road
workers for the Iowa Department of Transportation.
|
Ames, Iowa 50011, (515) 294-4111
Published by: University Relations,
online@iastate.edu
Copyright © 1995-2001, Iowa State University. All rights reserved.
|
|